Open Source?

[SquidB]

Been thinking about this for a couple of seconds....

One of the, if not the most sucessfull sim titles on the market is Microsoft flight sim.

The reason often cited is its open structure, one that allows 3rd party expansions and a wealth of mods from a massive community.

Whilst i respect SCS's decision to keep the rights to add extra platforms to the game, that does limit the response that many would be able to add to this great title. (esp given SCS's other commitments)

Perhaps its time that DW was opened up to those that would evolve the title. Surely it could only help sales? :hmm:

[Bellman]

I share your desire to dive the Traffy but my perspective is different.

I get few kicks from platform jumping - which IMO leads to becoming a 'jack of all trades, master of none'

I am content to wait for the delights that I know DWX will deliver if SCX is anything to go by.
Also I would prefer SA to concentrate on eliminating the most glaring faults in a patch asap.

So DWX not DWU.

[TLAM Strike]

Originally Posted by The Bellman

I get few kicks from platform jumping - which IMO leads to becoming a 'jack of all trades, master of none'

IMHO it leads to becoming the most useful and flexible guy in the battle group. The type of guy who can take you any time, anywhere, and with any thing.

[PeriscopeDepth]

Originally Posted by SquidB

Been thinking about this for a couple of seconds....

One of the, if not the most sucessfull sim titles on the market is Microsoft flight sim.

The reason often cited is its open structure, one that allows 3rd party expansions and a wealth of mods from a massive community.

Whilst i respect SCS's decision to keep the rights to add extra platforms to the game, that does limit the response that many would be able to add to this great title. (esp given SCS's other commitments)

Perhaps its time that DW was opened up to those that would evolve the title. Surely it could only help sales? :hmm:

Completely different situation. MSFS is made by one of the largest and most successful companies in the world and is the best selling sim in the world (as far as I know). DW is made by a small (but very talented!) company for a very niche market. I don't believe this niche market could be increased by a signifigant amount with an open architecture. Sonalysts is spending probably a relatively sizable amount of its resources on making DW as good as it is, where whatever MS spends on MSFS they know that they'll make it back in other products even if MSFS sells 5,000 less copies next time around. No matter how open DW becomes 98% of people are still going to consider naval warfare boring and uninteresting, and will pick up the next GTA sequel over DW. Sonalysts is a company and can't afford to throw away profits by giving away its monopoly on any addons. The same way they couldn't afford to throw away profits by having a major publisher put DW out.

[Bellman]

OK TLAM - you have a point.

But I guess you speak with mucho experience.

For the very 'average player' like me I've got to stick to my position in the team and become as proficient as possible.
That means focusing - thank *** we are not all alike.

Flight sim experience would suggest that you have a snow balls chance of survival in h**l if you keep jumping 'ships'

[Wim Libaers]

Originally Posted by The Bellman

OK TLAM - you have a point.

But I guess you speak with mucho experience.

For the very 'average player' like me I've got to stick to my position in the team and become as proficient as possible.
That means focusing - thank *** we are not all alike.

Flight sim experience would suggest that you have a snow balls chance of survival in h**l if you keep jumping 'ships'

I think it would matter much less than in flightsims. In a flightsim, you have two components: tactics and air combat skill. The second one is strongly linked to the capabilities of the plane. In DW, you're not steering manually, so what matters most are tactics, and they're applicable to a lot of platforms. Of course, aircraft, FFG and kilo are different, but using different nuclear subs should be doable if you remember the sound level difference and the Akula missiles.

Having some experience with the other platforms would also be useful even if you only play with an SSN, to know how they can be used against you.

[Wim Libaers]

Originally Posted by The Bellman

OK TLAM - you have a point.

But I guess you speak with mucho experience.

For the very 'average player' like me I've got to stick to my position in the team and become as proficient as possible.
That means focusing - thank *** we are not all alike.

Flight sim experience would suggest that you have a snow balls chance of survival in h**l if you keep jumping 'ships'

I think it would matter much less than in flightsims. In a flightsim, you have two components: tactics and air combat skill. The second one is strongly linked to the capabilities of the plane. In DW, you're not steering manually, so what matters most are tactics, and they're applicable to a lot of platforms. Of course, aircraft, FFG and kilo are different, but using different nuclear subs should be doable if you remember the sound level difference and the Akula missiles.

Having some experience with the other platforms would also be useful even if you only play with an SSN, to know how they can be used against you.

[Bellman]

It is and has been 'doable' its merely a question tending to specialise, for MP particularly.

Agreed flight sim tactics and skill are very closely associated with aircraft type - low-level terrain hugging
ingress and bombing in the Tornado is worlds appart from dogfighting a F16.

I wouldnt venture to prescribe specialisng for all, but I speak from my own experience.
Over three years I have mainly stuck with the Seawolf, taking other subs out occasionaly for a 'view from the other side'
The learning process with tactics, sonar, TMA continued/ues.

Three weeks specialising/focusing on the AK has developed skill expotentialy and continues.
If I consider, months from now that I have got ' a pass' with her then I will look at the Kilo.

Now I have the greatest respect and admiration for those divers like Molon Labe who demonstrate their skill
effectively using various sub types. Some soccer pros can play in a variety of positions, but the majority specialise .

Youve got to work with the hand your dealt.

[Ula Jolly]

Why would the ability to use third party addons remove the interest of some players??
I for one have wet dreams about cruising about in a Foxtrot, and I don't think the ability to add more playable and/or unplayable platforms would matter any, except keeping the interest at an extremely high point.
Those commited to their Seawolves would keep driving their Seawolves. Those who wanted a more spicy existence under water would drive their Typhoons. (Imagine ramming a Tico with a Typhoon. BAM! Splash one Tico! :rotfl
A group of people could take an in-game model (or make one themselves) and add instruments to it, model charicaristics, etc, and when they had time, SCS could go through the whole model (which would be extremely well documented so they knew what to look for) and choose wether to put it on their official pages either in a patch or an independent addition file, or not at all!
With so few playables around, and not too many onliny players, I don't think MP compatibility would be a problem for anyone after a week.

IMO, the addition of more platforms could not possibly SHRINK the community's size. It would add even more variation, make the game tad more spicy, and maybe even attract players who would like to experiment a lot!

As for subs, if all we needed was tactics, then we'd all be driving the same generic tincan. It's the FEEL of being in a Foxtrot you gotta love. You're not just a captain, you're not just THE captain, you're the captain of a <insert submarine name here>!

[Bellman]

:rotfl:

Just cant wait to Captain HMS TinCan

[mike_espo]

I agree with Ula. I think the game would gain more popularity if more platforms were added. I love DW, but I want to command a boomer, or the Foxtrot would be great too...

This need for variety has led me to purchase Harpoon 3. I am now starting to regret that decision. The Scenario editor sucks.. 10 times more buggy than ours. I also don't get the immersion as with DW

I do see Periscope Depth's point also. Sonalyst is a great company, and their product is great...but they do have to make money also.

Hopefully, in the end I hope Sonalyst will add more platforms or allow the community to do so.

[Bellman]

:rotfl:

Heinz 57 varieties - I'll stick to this tin can

H3 sucks after 10 minutes - wow

Roll up roll up join the 'Instant gratification' brigade

[big_feef]

Hhhhmm... I just got into naval sims with SH3; and now, I'm grabbing DW and SC as soon as I get back to the US (in two weeks). Yes, naval sims can be boring to some; but as a new-comer into the genre, I must disagree. All it requires is a lot of patience, a decent amount of skill, and you're rewarded with one of the most challenging and exciting gaming experience.

Unfortunately, I only got SH3 4 days before I had to travel to Cuba for a month; but in those 4 days, I had a ton of fun with the game. Nothing was quite as rewarding as finally getting to manual solutions and blowing the crap out of a convoy. And nothing is as rewarding as spending an hour running from 4 destroyers intent on sending you to DJ's locker; then pop up and nail two of them with your last two torps before running again.

So now, I've found this commnunity a few weeks ago and have been spending $2 an hour to log on to the forums from Cuba to lurk and learn about the newest interest in my gaming life. Anyway, my whole point is this: the majority of gamers will want run-and-gun games like HL2 and BF2; but there are many out there who are looking for a challenge and for something different. While I might not class myself as the typical FPS-goon, I do think there are many like me who would be drawn into this genre rather rapidly if these types of games had more exposure and general appeal. Not all simulations have to be 'niche' games.

[Caseck]

My only issue with the limited platforms, is a lot of folks who's experience in naval sims started with HARPOON, are turned off by the limited amount of platforms for "REDFOR"...

Really, as limited as many "REDFOR" platforms are in capability, it could be argued that more "REDFOR" or threat platforms should be made available.

I'm personally hoping for either a TU-95/142 on the threat side, or some kind of surface platform. (Krivak III?) Or better yet, OSCAR...

Or maybe they'll ramp up to a larger surf platform on the "REDFOR" size, to tune up for an Arleigh Burke or TICO on the "BLUFOR?"

Time will tell...

[UglyMowgli]

Before asking fot more plateforms, I prefer get those in the initial simulation but without bugs.